Appellant challenged possession measures under SARFAESI Act and cheque dishonour proceedings. Tribunal directed 25% pre-deposit, granted stay of measures pending payment of instalments, and posted for compliance.
Stay of further SARFAESI measures granted contingent on payment of first instalment of Rs.2 lakhs within a week.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson I.A. No. 227/2023 (WoD)
In
Appeal on Diary No. 521/2023
Between
Pramod Wasudeo Harshe … Appellant/s V/s.
Bank of Baroda & Anr.
…Respondent/s
Mr Suhas Handa, Advocate for Appellant.
Ms Durga Soni along with Ms Ashwini Lokhande, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
The Appellant is in an appeal impugning the order dated 03.03.2023 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Nagpur(D.R.T) in I.A. No. 506/2023 in S.A. No. 21/2021 seeking a stay of the further Sarfaesi measures intended to be taken by the Respondent Bank. A pursis has been filed by the Appellant before the D.R.T. stating that there is an outstanding amount of ₹16 lakhs which he undertook to pay within a stipulated time. The Ld. Presiding Officer granted time to deposit the amount. The Appellant could not pay the amount as directed. He did pay certain amounts which were not sufficient to wipe off the debt and as of the date, according to the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent, the outstanding amount is about ₹16 lakhs. The Appellant is aggrieved because the Ld. Presiding Officer of D.R.T. Nagpur has directed the possession to be handed over in
1
case of non-compliance with the directions to deposit the amount in instalments. It is also understood that the Appellant had issued four cheques out of which two were dishonoured and the Respondent Bank has initiated the proceedings under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the Appellant for dishonouring the cheques. The Appellant has challenged the Sarfaesi measures on various grounds. In view of the undertaking by the Appellant to pay the entire debt, there appears to be a waiver of the challenge raised by him under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act. I find no prima facie in favour of the Appellant to exercise jurisdiction of this Tribunal to reduce the amount to a minimum of 25%. The outstanding amount being around ₹16 lakhs, the Appellant is, directed to deposit a sum of ₹7 lakhs as pre-deposit for entertaining the appeal.
2
invested in term deposits in the name of Registrar, DRAT, Mumbai, with any nationalised bank, initially for 13 months, and thereafter to be renewed periodically.
Post on 09.05.2023 for reporting compliance concerning the payment of 1st instalment.
Sd/-
Chairperson
mks-02
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Appellant is entitled to a stay on further SARFAESI measures without a reduced pre-deposit.
Whether the jurisdictional requirements for entertaining the appeal have been met.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pramod Wasudeo Harshe
Bank of Baroda
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
